Jurisdictional disputes in the motion-picture Industry : hearings before a special subcommittee of the Committee on Education and Labor, House of Representatives, Eightieth Congress, first-session, pursuant to H. Res. 111 (1948)

Record Details:

Something wrong or inaccurate about this page? Let us Know!

Thanks for helping us continually improve the quality of the Lantern search engine for all of our users! We have millions of scanned pages, so user reports are incredibly helpful for us to identify places where we can improve and update the metadata.

Please describe the issue below, and click "Submit" to send your comments to our team! If you'd prefer, you can also send us an email to mhdl@commarts.wisc.edu with your comments.




We use Optical Character Recognition (OCR) during our scanning and processing workflow to make the content of each page searchable. You can view the automatically generated text below as well as copy and paste individual pieces of text to quote in your own work.

Text recognition is never 100% accurate. Many parts of the scanned page may not be reflected in the OCR text output, including: images, page layout, certain fonts or handwriting.

418 MOTION-PICTURE JURISDICTIONAL DISPUTES the studio there had been discussed this matter between Colonel Joy and Darryl Zanuck and someone else. They were displeased. He said in his estimation I was right in the position I had taken in everything I said. There was a telephone call from Mr. Luddy to my superior, president of the university, asking if he could come out to talk to my superior about me. The position taken by my superior, as he reported it to me, was, I think, a very fair one. He told me he told Mr. Luddy — he suggested that Mr. Luddy talk to me. And Mr. Luddy told him he did not want to talk to me. He wanted to talk to him about me. My superior told Mr. Luddy he was perfectly free to come out and talk to him about anything except me. And he was perfectly free to talk to me about me, but not to come out and talk to my superior about me. His reaction indicated to me — I couldn't understand why this anger, why this effort to stop any movement in this' direction if it were true the producers and the lATSE were amenable to any honest proposals to settle the thing. Even if they thought the proposals could not be effectively carried, out, they should have been agreeable to make some gesture of willingness to sit down and talk about them instead of trying to immediately stop the whole movement. Following this the screen actors. Screen Writers Guild published a two-page advertisement, at their own expense, in the Hollywood Variety, — I don't have a copy of it — in which they repeated the proposals I had made. They published a telegram they had sent to the producers asking them to respond. "What is your response to these proposals?" and stating in the advertisement that the Conference of Studio Unions had agreed, expressed unqualified acceptance. The producers had made no response. Concluding this, in the advertisement, that in view of this failure to respond to these various proposals of any kind, they were forced to conclude what existed in their industry was a lock-out of the workers. The next development Mr. McCaxn. Just a moment, please. I would like to ask if that can be procured for the record. Father Dunne. I think I gave Mr. Cobb a copy. Mr. McCann. I would like to have that received in the record for reference pur^jose, purely to give us the speech you referred to awhile ago. Mr. Kearns. We will recess for 10 minutes. (Short recess taken.) Mr. Kearns. The hearing will come to order. Father Dunne. Mr. Chairman, may I correct an erroneous statement ? Mr. IvEARNS. No objection. Father Dunne, The very beginning I stated that Mr. Daniel Marshall had been counsel for the lATSE. That was a careless statement. He Avas not counsel for the lATSE. He was counsel, I believe, for one of the lATSE locals here in Los Angeles before the Willie Bioff era. Now, the next efforts that were made by outsiders to bring these parties together was made by the two official appointees of the Catholic archdiocese in Los Angeles. Monsignor Devlin, who is the Catholic